Michael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

My comments arise out of the topic under discussion with Men's Aid Ireland. Last night I watched an hour-long documentary on BBC about sexual abuse of young boys and men in football. We heard of the extraordinary obstacles they had when it came of making any disclosures at all. This was partially based on their gender and the social attitude towards male victims of sexual assault. It was harrowing to watch the programme because these were men in their 50s weeping because of their recollections of what had happened to them and how they had suppressed what had happened to them.

One question I have relates to the extent to which anyone now being accused of a sexual offence can rely on the right not to give evidence. Is that gone? There was a time when it was sometimes deployed and the accused simply never gave evidence. There is a case to be made for not allowing unsworn exculpatory explanations or statements made by the accused to gardaí investing the matter to come into evidence, especially if it is circumvented the sexual history prohibition that would normally be there. My question is for the practitioners and the support groups. Is it the case that no one sits out a case anymore and simply relies on the statements made to the Garda? Is that a real issue any longer?

Is it thought that the Director of Public Prosecutions prosecution criteria are too strict or just about right? Are they too lax? Is it fair to put someone who is a complainant, whether male or female, in a weak case through the process of a trial to avoid the accusation of not being supportive?

If we are to try to eliminate all the preliminary issues and the trials within trials and have a straightforward trial of the issues in future in accordance with what the Department of Justice is planning to do, as I fully support, is there a case for some kind of standardised training video to be made available to a jury once empanelled to get across some of the background difficulties of trying a sexual assault case? The Judicial Council might approve a video, which would remind a jury of some of the basic facts. I know it is the judge's duty to charge a jury and bring relevant propositions to a jury's attention, but judges vary and some of them are better communicators than others.

There might be something to be said for supplying juries with a video once empanelled to set out some of the basic facts about the difficulties witnesses face, the complexities of sexual cases and the rules that are applied in order that the jury knows, for instance, that the sexual history of a complainant is not normally permitted to be gone into. Those are issues that should be brought to the attention of juries to give them some help in carrying out their functions. It might be useful to give them an educational video in that context.

I seek some feedback on those three points. It is a long time since I appeared in a criminal case, let alone a sexual criminal case, and I am interested to know whether people can allow their counsel to attack their accuser, and then sit back, give no evidence at all and rely on an explanation given to the Garda getting in by the back door.